From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750971AbWDKT2P (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:28:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751091AbWDKT2P (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:28:15 -0400 Received: from prgy-npn2.prodigy.com ([207.115.54.38]:59282 "EHLO oddball.prodigy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750971AbWDKT2O (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:28:14 -0400 Message-ID: <443C0410.4080306@tmr.com> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:31:28 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20060410 SeaMonkey/1.5a MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: 40% IDE performance regression going from FC3 to FC5 with same kernel References: <5a4c581d0604080747w61464d48k5480391d98b2bc47@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5a4c581d0604080747w61464d48k5480391d98b2bc47@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alessandro Suardi wrote: > I'll be filing a FC5 performance bug for this but would like an opinion > from the IDE kernel people just in case this has already been seen... > > I just upgraded my home K7-800, 512MB RAM box from FC3 to FC5 > and noticed a disk performance slowdown while copying files around. > > System has two 160GB disks, a Samsung SP1604N 2MB cache and > a Maxtor 6Y160P0 8MB cache; both disks appear to be almost 2x > slower both on hdparm -t tests (17-19MB/s against 33/35 MB/s) and > on dd tests, like this: > > FC3 > [root@donkey tmp]# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null skip=200 bs=1024k count=200 > 200+0 records in > 200+0 records out > > real 0m4.623s > user 0m0.004s > sys 0m1.308s > > FC5 > [root@donkey tmp]# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null skip=200 bs=1024k count=200 > 200+0 records in > 200+0 records out > 209715200 bytes (210 MB) copied, 9.67808 seconds, 21.7 MB/s > > real 0m9.683s > user 0m0.008s > sys 0m1.400s > > > The initial tests were my last FC3 self-compiled kernel (2.6.16-rc5-git8) > vs FC5's 2.6.16-1.2080_FC5 kernel; so just to be sure, I copied over > from my FC3 partition the 2.6.16-rc5-git8 kernel and its config file, > and rebuilt it under FC5, with just a few differences for the new USB > 2.0 disk I added to a PCI controller I just put in, namely > > [root@donkey linux-2.6.16-rc5-git8]# diff .config > /fc3/usr/src/linux-2.6.16-rc5-git8/.config > 4c4 > < # Fri Apr 7 03:58:23 2006 > --- >> # Mon Mar 6 22:49:32 2006 > 1110,1112c1110 > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=m > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_SPLIT_ISO=y > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_ROOT_HUB_TT=y > --- >> # CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD is not set > 1115c1113 > < CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=m > --- >> CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=y > 1218d1215 > < # CONFIG_USB_SISUSBVGA is not set > > The result is unexpected - performance delta is still there. Concatenating > output from hdparm -i /dev/hda and hdparm /dev/hda for the same kernel > under FC3 and FC5, the only difference is > > [root@donkey ~]# diff /tmp/hdparm.out.2616rc2git8-fc5 > /tmp/hdparm.out.2616rc2git8 > 14c14 > < Drive conforms to: (null): ATA/ATAPI-1 ATA/ATAPI-2 ATA/ATAPI-3 > ATA/ATAPI-4 ATA/ATAPI-5 ATA/ATAPI-6 ATA/ATAPI-7 > --- >> Drive conforms to: (null): > 27c27 > < geometry = 19457/255/63, sectors = 312581808, start = 0 > --- >> geometry = 19457/255/63, sectors = 160041885696, start = 0 > > I'll try now and rebuild a 2.6.16-rc5-git8 kernel under FC5 with the > FC3 GCC and see whether that is responsible for the performance > drop... of course if anyone has any idea about what's going on, I > will be happy to try out stuff. Attaching hdparm output from the FC5 > 2.6.16-rc5-git8 just to show that there is DMA etc. all configured fine. Could you look at params with hdparm, and display the readahead with "blockdev --getra" and see if this is read or write limited?